Q: As an appointed member of a City committee I have made several complaints to the County Air Quality District due to egregious violations of CEQA by a rogue contractor who was receiving no oversight from the city. The Chair of my committee, whose employer gets subcontracts from this “rogue contractor,” has now drafted a set of “communication protocols” that would:
[1] prevent any committee member from going to an outside agency for resolution without first going through the City Staff and the Chair. The timeline to follow this process could take up to a week or more, which would be long after violations had been observed and thus less likely for an outside agency to intervene.
[2] it is at the discretion of the chair whether or not to place an item requested by a committee member or the public onto the agenda. I was just prevented on putting an item on the most recent meetings agenda, although we (a dozen community members and I) were allowed to have a non-agendized, non-action conversation during the meeting.
If these protocols pass, will I be bound by them or do I still have the right as a concerned citizen to make a complaint to an outside agency so long as I am not representing myself as a committee member? Is it within the accepted rules that a chair can prevent a committee member from placing an item on the agenda?
A: Indeed, the communications protocol, which, intentionally or not, would seem to slow the reporting process for suspected violations to outside agencies, is concerning. It would seem that the city and its committee could not prevent you, as an individual and concerned citizen, from taking your concerns to the appropriate agency without first going through the process that the city has set up.
With respect to your second inquiry regarding discussions of non items at committee meetings, this may be a violation of the Brown Act, which requires that any items that a legislative body intends to discuss at a meeting be included in the agenda, even if the legislative body does not intend to vote on that item.
See Gov’t Code § 54954.2(a)(1) (“At least 72 hours before a regular meeting, the legislative body of the local agency, or its designee, shall post an agenda containing a brief general description of each item of business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting, including items to be discussed in closed session.”).
As you can see, the Brown Act requires makes clear that even just the discussion of an item requires notice of that item
to be included on an agenda. You might want to bring this to the attention of the committee president and ask that in the future, all items that the legislative will discuss, whether the committee intends to vote on those items, be included on the agenda
so any interested member of the public who wishes to hear the discussion (and comment on the item during the public comment period) is afforded the opportunity to do so.
Bryan Cave LLP is general counsel for the First Amendment Coalition and responds to FAC hotline inquiries. In responding to these inquiries, we can give general information regarding open government and speech issues but cannot provide specific legal advice or representation.